OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

office message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]


Subject: RE: Submission of the OpdnDocument CD3 for OASIS standardization


Hi Michael,

  We need to clean up a few things before I can issue the call for vote on Friday.

1.  cover page - Jason Harrop's company is listed, but Jason is an individual member of OASIS. Having your company name listed is
one of the benefits of corporate memebership.

2. certification by OASIS member organizations: neither Koffice nor OpenOffice are OASIS members which leaves you one short; I think
you have plenty of certifications from OASIS member companies, you just need to resubmit the email below showing all of those that
have sent certifications that are member companies.

3. appendix - can you copy this into a document or spreadsheet and upload to Kavi? That way I can link to it rather than having to
incorporate the comments directly. Just include the link when you re-send the submission email.

  Please have the updated documents and submissions to be my end of day Thursday; if there's any problem let me know and I'll be
happy to help out in any way that I can.

Regards,

Mary

---------------------------------------------------
Mary P McRae
OASIS 
Manager of TC Administration
email: mary.mcrae@oasis-open.org  
web: www.oasis-open.org 
phone: 603.232.9090
cell: 603.557.7985
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael Brauer [mailto:Michael.Brauer@Sun.COM] 
> Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2005 10:27 AM
> To: mary.mcrae@oasis-open.org
> Subject: Submission of the OpdnDocument CD3 for OASIS standardization
> 
> Hi Mary,
> 
> the OpenDocument TC has voted for submitting the OpenDocument 
> Committee Draft 3 to OASIS membership for consideration as an 
> OASIS Standard:
> 
> http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/office/ballot.php?id=701
> 
> As authorized by this vote, I am hereby submitting the 
> OpenDocument Committee Draft 3 for OASIS standardization.
> 
> The OASIS TC process states:
> 
>    A TC may recommend that the Committee Draft be made an OASIS
>    Standard. Upon resolution of the TC to move the specification
>    forward, its chair shall submit the following items to OASIS TC
>    Administration:
> 
>    1. A formal specification that is a valid member of its type,
>       together with appropriate documentation for the
>       specification, both of which must be written using approved
>       OASIS templates;
> 
>    2. A clear English-language summary of the specification;
> 
>    3. A statement regarding the relationship of this specification
>       to similar work of other OASIS TCs or other standards
>       developing organizations;
> 
>    4. Certification by at least three OASIS member organizations
>       that they are successfully using the specification
>       consistently with the OASIS IPR Policy;
> 
>    5. An account of each of the comments/issues raised during the
>       public review period, along with its resolution;
> 
>    6. An account of and results of the voting to approve the
>       approve the specification as a Committee Draft;
> 
>    7. An account of or pointer to votes and comments received in
>       any earlier attempts to standardize substantially the same
>       specification, together with the originating TC's response
>       to each comment;
> 
>    8. A pointer to the publicly visible comments archive for the
>       originating TC;
> 
>    9. A statement from the chair of the TC certifying that all
>       members of the TC have been provided with a copy of the
>       OASIS IPR Policy; and
> 
>    10. Optionally, a pointer to any minority reports submitted by
>       one or more TC members who did not vote in favor of
>       approving the Committee Draft, or certification by the chair
>       that no minority reports exist.
> 
> The following items are hereby submitted pursuant to the 
> OASIS requirements cited above.
> 
> 1. A formal specification that is a valid member of its type,
>    together with appropriate documentation for the specification,
>    both of which must be written using approved OASIS templates
> 
>       See Open Document Format for Office Applications (OpenDocument)
>       1.0 Committee Draft 3, in particular, the three embedded
>       normative Relax-NG schemas.
> 
>       The specification document is available in PDF format at
> 
> http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/11681/office
> -spec-1.0-cd-3.pdf
> 
>       and in OpenOffice.org XML format at
> 
> http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/11682/office
> -spec-1.0-cd-3.sxw.
> 
> 
>       For convenience, the embedded Relax-NG schemas are also
>       available as separate files. These files have been extracted
>       automatically from the specification schema (in the event of
>       a conflict, only the embedded ones are normative):
> 
>       OpenDocument Relax-NG Schema (extracted from chapter 1 to 16
>       of the specification):
> 
> http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/11680/office
> -schema-1.0-cd-3.rng
> 
> 
>       OpenDocument Manifest Relax-NG Schema (extracted from chapter
>       17 of the specification):
> 
> http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/11679/office
> -manifest-schema-1.0-cd-3.rng
> 
> 
>       OpenDocument Strict Relax-NG Schema (extracted from appendix A
>       of the specification):
> 
> http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/11678/office
> -strict-schema-1.0-cd-3.rng
> 
> 
> 
> 2. A clear English-language summary of the specification
> 
>       The OpenDocument specification defines an XML schema for
>       office applications and its semantics. The schema is suitable
>       for office documents, including text documents, spreadsheets,
>       charts and graphical documents like drawings or presentations,
>       but is not restricted to these kinds of documents.
> 
>       The schema provides for high-level information suitable for
>       editing documents. It defines suitable XML structures for
>       office documents and is friendly to transformations using XSLT
>       or similar XML-based tools.
> 
> 
> 3. A statement regarding the relationship of this specification to
>    similar work of other OASIS TCs or other standards developing
>    organizations
> 
>       OpenDocument makes use of the following standards, either by
>       direct inclusion, or by adopting some of their concepts,
>       elements and attribute names, or semantics:
> 
>           Dublin Core Metadata Element Set
>           W3C (X)HTML
>           W3C MathML
>           W3C SMIL
>           W3C SVG
>           W3C XLink
>           W3C XForms
>           W3C XSL FO
> 
>       While all these standards cover some aspects of documents
>       created by office applications, none of these standards covers
>       all aspects of such documents, or could be extended to cover
>       all these aspects.
> 
>       OpenDocument is based on the open source community developed
>       OpenOffice.org XML file format.
> 
> 
> 4. Certification by at least three OASIS member organizations that
>    they are successfully using the specification consistently with
>    the OASIS IPR Policy
> 
>       The following OASIS member organizations have certified to
>       the TC that they are successfully using OpenDocument:
> 
>          Sun Microsystems
> 
> http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/office/200502/msg00015.html
> 
>          KOffice (represented By Mr. David Faure)
>             
> http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/office/200502/msg00016.html
> 
>          OpenOffice.org (represented by Mr. Gary Edwards)
>             
> http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/office/200502/msg00026.html
> 
>          Stellent
> 
> http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/office/200503/msg00012.html
> 
> 
> 5. An account of each of the comments/issues raised during the
>    public review period, along with its resolution.
> 
>       The public review took place for the OpenDocument Committee
>       Draft 2. Comments submitted regarding the OpenDocument review
>       of January 2005, together with their disposition by the TC, can
>       be found in the appendix at the end of this document
> 
>       Where the TC considered it to be essential, the comments have
>       been addressed in the Committee Draft 3, which is the basis of
>       this submission. The TC considers the changes made between
>       committee draft 2 and 3 to be not substantive, and therefore
>       did not conduct another review. A list of changes made from
>       Committee Draft 2 to Committee Draft 3 is available in appendix
>       E.2 of the specification.
> 
>       It should be noted that the Committee Draft 1 (called Open
>       Office specification) is available publicly since March, the
>       22th 2004.
> 
> 
> 6. An account of and results of the voting to approve the
>    specification as a Committee Draft
> 
>       Results of the CD ballot can be found at
> 
> http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/office/ballot.php?id=699
> 
> 
> 7. An account of or pointer to votes and comments received in any
>    earlier attempts to standardize substantially the same
>    specification, together with the originating TC's response to
>    each comment
> 
>       OpenDocument has not previously been submitted for OASIS
>       standardization.
> 
> 
> 8. A pointer to the publicly visible comments archive for the
>    originating TC
> 
>       The OpenDocument comment archive is located at
> 
>       http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/office-comment/
> 
> 
> 9. A statement from the chair of the TC certifying that all
>    members of the TC have been provided with a copy of the OASIS
>    IPR Policy
> 
>       Members of the TC were formally notified by email in the
>       message archived at
> 
>       http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/office/200502/msg00012.html
> 
> 
> 10. Optionally, a pointer to any minority reports submitted by one
>     or more TC members who did not vote in favor of approving the
>     Committee Draft, or certification by the chair that no minority
>     reports exist.
> 
>       No minority reports were submitted.
> 
> Michael Brauer
> 
> Chair, OASIS OpenDocument TC
> 
> 
> APPENDIX
> 
> List of comments/issues raised during the public review 
> period, along with its resolution.
> 
> 1. Improved definition of formula syntax:
> 
> http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/office-comment/200501/msg
> 00000.html
> http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/office-comment/200502/msg
> 00000.html
> 
>     Resolution: The TC thinks that having interoperability on that
>     level would be of great benefit to users, but does not believe
>     that this is in the scope of the current specification,
>     especially since the formula syntax is not specifically related
>     to the actual XML format the specification describes.
> 
> 
> 2. Support for custom schemas
> 
> http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/office-comment/200501/msg
> 00002.html
> 
>     Resolution: The TC considers custom schema support to be not
>     essential for the current version of the specification, but
>     had already identified custom schema support
>     as a possible enhancement for a future version of the
>     specification before the public review has started.
> 
> 
> 3. Usage of SVG namespace
> 
> http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/office-comment/200501/msg
> 00005.html
> 
>     Resolution: The TC discussed the usage of the SVG namespace with
>     the W3C SVG working group and agreed with them to not include
>     the W3C SVG namespace any longer, but to define a new one within
>     the OpenDocument specification that contains the attributes and
>     element that were previously imported from the SVG namespace.
> 
>     Since the W3C XSL-FO and W3C SMIL namespaces were used in the
>     same way as the SVG namespace, the TC further agreed to
>     take the same action for these namespaces.
> 
>     The TC further discussed the usage of the W3C XForms namespace
>     with the W3C XForms working group. As a result of these
>     discussions, the TC agreed to rename the  xforms:submission
>     attribute to form:xforms-submission.
> 
>     The above changes, together with the update of a non normative
>     appendix, resulted in Committee Draft 3.
> 
> 



[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]